The Batman | March 4, 2022 | Warner Bros. | Certified Fresh on RT | 7th Most Profitable Movie of 2023

[Juby]

So, the 4th Joker in 6 years (Leto, Phoenix, Gotham-tv-series, and now this one).  I stopped waiting for the sequel. Terrible, fan-fiction feel scene and bad casting choice.

[Tarintino]

47 minutes ago, Liiviig 1998 said:

The general rule is 2-2.5* production budget

185-200*2.5

The 350m number includes the marketing budget.

 

250-350m PDT + MKT budget is pretty standard for major tentpole blockbusters.

 

Grace Randolph's take on breakeven is shit and not properly informed.

 

Her movie maths on batman have been shit .

 

Everything Ive ever read states a movie needs to make around 2x its production and advertising budget to break even, not budget alone. Considering theatre chains take around 40-50% of the gross whilst internationally is much higher, its seems on average a movie gets around 50% of its total gross, so making just 2-2.5 its production budget alone and ignoring the advertising budget seems incorrect 

 

 

18 hours ago, BruiseCruise said:

Pretty sure most of the marketing budget got covered with tie ins and such, even eternals got 100mil from that, batman definitely got that much atleast

Do you have a link for this? As i can't find anything online and its hard to believe that less money was spent on marketing The Batman than it was on marketing the Joker which apparently cost 120m by the same studio

Edited March 25, 2022 by Tarintino

[Liiviig 1998]

1 hour ago, Tarintino said:

To be honest, i think people are just bitter they dont have Grace Randolf's job

I'm subscribe to her channel . She has some good takes and bad misinformed ones and this was one of them.

 

This response is just don't think, consume product. 

 

I listen to lots of YouTubers and they can have both good and terrible takes, they are not full proof and can make mistakes or misinformed ,bad or very biased opinionated content.

 

I can agree she gets  lots of hate but she has also produced some really dicy takes which are her opinions and it's fine but when it comes to quantitative takes like budgets,profit, breakeven points which can be amply researched to come to a desirable conclusion. 

Her breakeven point for batman is just misinformed.

 

Her take is that 2b is the new billion is kind of weird. I understand what she is trying to say but come on only 5 films have reached that mark. The data doesnt substainte her claim.

 

 

 

 

 

[SupermanLego]

21 minutes ago, Tarintino said:

 

Everything Ive ever read states a movie needs to make around 2x its production and advertising budget to break even, not budget one

 

 

Do you have a link for this? As i can't find anything online and its hard to believe that less money was spent on marketing The Batman than it was on marketing the Joker which cost 120m by the same studio

I'm sure its budget. 2.5X budget is break even point.

[Legion Again]

18 minutes ago, Liiviig 1998 said:

Her take is that 2b is the new billion is kind of weird. I understand what she is trying to say but come on only 5 films have reached that mark. The data doesnt substainte her claim.

 

So the same amount as we had 1B films in 2010. 2B has the same rarity and megahit status as 1B used to have, just a dozen years ago.  
 

In other words… 2B is the new 1B.

[Liiviig 1998]

25 minutes ago, Tarintino said:

Everything Ive ever read states a movie needs to make around 2x its production and advertising budget to break even, not budget one

Man of steel had a total budget of 375m .it made 668m WW and profit of around 50m according to deadline

 

By that logic it would need 725m to breakeven . Yet it clearly made profit.  And it's not just an exception ,they are lots  of examples I can give where that rule would not work.

 

 

[Legion Again]

The rule of thumb is indeed 2.5x production only, but the thing about rules of thumb of course is they are just rules of thumb. Doesn’t even take into account different revenue % from different territories, for one thing (teeing DOM heavy and very china light actually favors Batman there, it is definitely solidly profitable despite the low 800s likely finish).

[Liiviig 1998]

2 minutes ago, Villain Legion said:

So the same amount as we had 1B films in 2010. 2B has the same rarity and megahit status as 1B used to have, just a dozen years ago.  
 

In other words… 2B is the new 1B.

Well if you word like that . Fair enough. Like I said in OP . I get what she  was trying to say.  1.5b+ is rare too though. but not for long.

[Legion Again]

8 minutes ago, Liiviig 1998 said:

Well if you word like that . Fair enough. Like I said in OP . I get what she  was trying to say.  1.5b+ is rare too though. but not for long.

Yeah it’s interesting to look at the history of the number of movies past a certain threshold. Doesn’t proceed as steadily as would be convenient. While I note that the number of 2B is similar to the number past 1B a dozen years ago, we also know that we got a bunch more from 2011-2015 — and in the next 5 years I bet we see 1-4 new movies past 2B. The big difference is that China was a hugely populous emerging market at the time and there is no equivalent now — if anything the decline of CBO, especially when it comes to HW, will be an artificial headwind on nominal WW gross growth instead of an artificial tailwind. Though the early 2020s has unusually high global inflation, vs the unusually low global inflation of the early 2010s
 

So is 2B the new 1B? Well, sort of. But also 1.5B is sort of the new 1B. Depends what you mean.

Edited March 25, 2022 by Villain Legion

[Tarintino]

26 minutes ago, Liiviig 1998 said:

I'm subscribe to her channel . She has some good takes and bad misinformed ones and this was one of them.

 

This response is just don't think, consume product. 

 

I listen to lots of YouTubers and they can have both good and terrible takes, they are not full proof and can make mistakes or misinformed ,bad or very biased opinionated content.

 

I can agree she gets  lots of hate but she has also produced some really dicy takes which are her opinions and it's fine but when it comes to quantitative takes like budgets,profit, breakeven points which can be amply researched to come to a desirable conclusion. 

Her breakeven point for batman is just misinformed.

 

Her take is that 2b is the new billion is kind of weird. I understand what she is trying to say but come on only 5 films have reached that mark. The data doesnt substainte her claim.

 

 

 

 

 

But 2b is the new billion depending on how long you've viewed box office. In 2009, only 4 movies had ever made 1b including Avatar. 10 years later and now 5 movies have grossed 2b. That seems like a pefectly resonable comment from her, one Ive parroted.

 

In 2008 the top 10 movies worldwide earned a combined total of 6.3b, compared to 2019's 11b total. That's a 75% increase and now we have even high levels of inflation. 2019 saw 9 movies make 1b at the box office, 10 years ago that was unimaginable. 2b is now was rare as 1b used to be so she's right

[Legion Again]

Speaking purely subjectively, if JW3 hits 1.55B, or an MCU this year gets a China release and does 1.55B, I am not going to have the same “oh my god this is historically huge” reaction as with say TDK or TS3 hitting 1B. I really do need to see a leading 2 for that at this point (though NWH counts since it’s an honors 2.3 or whatever).

[Tarintino]

21 minutes ago, Liiviig 1998 said:

Man of steel had a total budget of 375m .it made 668m WW and profit of around 50m according to deadline

 

By that logic it would need 725m to breakeven . Yet it clearly made profit.  And it's not just an exception ,they are lots  of examples I can give where that rule would not work.

 

 

Im sure there are exceptions to the rule but so far we have limited info on the advertsing budget of The Batman so it seems premature to call out Grace's comments as bullshit just yet

[Liiviig 1998]

9 minutes ago, Tarintino said:

But 2b is the new billion depending on how long you've viewed box office. In 2009, only 4 movies had ever made 1b including Avatar. 10 years later and now 5 movies have grossed 2b. That seems like a pefectly resonable comment from her, one Ive parroted.

 

In 2008 the top 10 movies worldwide earned a combined total of 6.3b, compared to 2019's 11b total. That's a 75% increase and now we have even high levels of inflation. 2019 saw 9 movies make 1b at the box office, 10 years ago that was unimaginable. 2b is now was rare as 1b used to be so she's right

Fair enough if you look at it in that context.

[Liiviig 1998]

23 minutes ago, Villain Legion said:

Speaking purely subjectively, if JW3 hits 1.55B, or an MCU this year gets a China release and does 1.55B, I am not going to have the same “oh my god this is historically huge” reaction as with say TDK or TS3 hitting 1B. I really do need to see a leading 2 for that at this point (though NWH counts since it’s an honors 2.3 or whatever).

JW3 instance doesn't work for me bse the first one already made 650m+Dom/1.67bn WW. So it making 1.55bn would not give me that " oh my God" reaction either.

 

 For MCU it depends . BP and DS making 1.5bn wouldn't give me such a reaction . But if Thor 4 ,CM ,antman 3 made that it would be a big surprise.

 

 

 

 

[Legion Again]

6 minutes ago, Liiviig 1998 said:

JW3 instance doesn't work for me bse the first one already made 650m+Dom/1.67bn WW. So it making 1.55bn would not give me that " oh my God" reaction either.

 

 For MCU it depends . BP and DS making 1.5bn wouldn't give me such a reaction . But if Thor 4 ,CM ,antman 3 made that it would be a big surprise.

 

 

 

 

Yeah, but the fact that there are several movies this year where you wouldn’t have such a reaction to 1.5 kind of reinforces the point that 1.5B isn’t a high enough threshold.

[cax16]

All I’ll say about Gr*ce is she knows exactly who her audience is and what they wanna hear. 
 

General rule of thumb has always been 2.5X production budget. That doesn’t suddenly change with The Batman. That’s not how this works. 

[BruiseCruise]

1 hour ago, Tarintino said:

 

Everything Ive ever read states a movie needs to make around 2x its production and advertising budget to break even, not budget alone. Considering theatre chains take around 40-50% of the gross whilst internationally is much higher, its seems on average a movie gets around 50% of its total gross, so making just 2-2.5 its production budget alone and ignoring the advertising budget seems incorrect 

 

 

Do you have a link for this? As i can't find anything online and its hard to believe that less money was spent on marketing The Batman than it was on marketing the Joker which apparently cost 120m by the same studio

https://deadline.com/2021/11/eternals-brand-marketing-campaign-lexus-la-rams-mcdonalds-geico-1234868393/

[Tarintino]

1 minute ago, BruiseCruise said:

https://deadline.com/2021/11/eternals-brand-marketing-campaign-lexus-la-rams-mcdonalds-geico-1234868393/

I meant for The Batman, not Eternals 😄

[Tarintino]

11 minutes ago, cax16 said:

All I’ll say about Gr*ce is she knows exactly who her audience is and what they wanna hear. 
 

General rule of thumb has always been 2.5X production budget. That doesn’t suddenly change with The Batman. That’s not how this works. 

 

Endgame apparently made 890m profit with a budget of 356m and advertising budget of 200m. Going by the 2x rules of production plus P&A, it would have needed about 1.1b to break even, leaving 1.7b extra in revenue. If they take 50% of that, it gives 850m so the math works out.

 

Going by your rule of thumb, it's profit would have been higher than 1b, which sources say it wasn't. Even with Avatar, the budget + advertising was about 400m leaving it with a profit of around 1b give or take. According to your rule though its profit would have been around 1.15b which was too high. 

[filmnerdjamie]

18 hours ago, Coneilg93 said:

Trending #1. Joker is a big sell. WB testing the waters to see how people will react to this new joker. They could’ve easily waited for the DVD release. 

My guess is they're only releasing this scene now (and for the DVD/Blu Ray, obviously) because they know they are not intending to use Joker in the immediate sequel... or Barry Keoghan himself in the role.

 

If they aren't going forward with him, it does no harm to go ahead and show it.

 

If they were moving forward with Barry, why give away his big reveal for free when the sequel won't be out for another 2-3 years? Takes away from any anticipation of seeing how he would do in the role.